Nevertheless, the vast majority of federal prosecutors have been vehemently opposed to even the most modest modicum of relief. They have become anxious about calls for alleviation from the very same public they purport to protect. Recent moves by Eric Holder to slightly ease certain criminal penalties were met with nothing less than a rebellion by the army of federal prosecutors he purportedly leads. These federal prosecutors have over the course of time become vested with power that often exceeds even that of federal judges, making them the real decision makers in federal courtrooms. It should come as no surprise that this near limitless power will not be relinquished without a fight. Those most benefitting from the policy of mass incarceration have become the biggest supporters of maintaining the status quo.
Upon hearing Attorney General Holder's initial calls for sentencing reform, the National Association of Assistant United States Attorneys (NAAUSA), an organization dedicated to advancing the interests of federal prosecutors, send Holder a letter objecting to his endorsement of the bipartisan Smarter Sentencing Act. The letter, signed by NAAUSA president, AUSA Robert Gay Guthrie, stated that calls for sentencing reform should be resisted. AUSA Guthrie evidently sees nothing wrong with a nation with five percent of the world's population housing 25 percent of the world's prisoners.
AUSA Robert Gay Guthrie continues to lead federal prosecutors in staunchly resist sentencing reform, in open defiance of Attorney General Holder
Guthrie's letter stated that the "merits of mandatory minimums are abundantly clear." He further asserted that they impact "only the most serious of crimes" and "target the most serious criminals."
The contentions in Guthrie's letter are patently false. Burgeoning federal prisons are loaded with low level, nonviolent drug offenders. Because of aggressive application of mandatory minimum sentences, many of these nonviolent offenders are forced to spend decades in federal prison.
Knowledgeable observers immediately recognized Guthrie's letter as nothing more than self-serving prevarication. David Zlotnick, a former AUSA who now opposes mandatory minimums, took issue with the NAAUSA's claims.
"This is a biased letter with an ulterior motive- to make federal prosecutors' jobs easier," Zlotnick wrote. "Federal prosecutors should stand for justice and fairness as well as public safety. This letter and this organization's position are shortsighted and biased and do not represent the views of all prosecutors."
While Zlotnick may be correct in his assertion that the letter's sentiments do not represent the views of all prosecutors, it certainly states the opinion of most. U.S. attorney's offices throughout the U.S. are predominantly staffed with rigid ideologues that advance their careers through convicting at any cost. Federal prosecutors like Zlotnick, who possess a sense of justice and a duty to play by the rules, are a distinct minority and typically squeezed out.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
3
3
2
